Assertion (A):The President can recommend to Parliament to change the boundary of any State after seeking the views of the concerned State Legislature on the subject within a specified period.Reason (R):It is not mandatory for the President to accept the proposal of the concerned State Legislature.Select the correct answer using the code given below.

1. A

   Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).

   Option (a) claims both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A). However, while both statements are factually correct individually, Reason (R) does not explain why the President recommends the boundary change or why state views must be sought.

2. B

   Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

   Option (b) claims both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A). Assertion (A) correctly states the constitutional provision under Article 3 where the President refers a bill for boundary alterations to the state legislature with a specified time limit, and Reason (R) correctly notes that the state legislature's views are not binding on the President or Parliament, making this option completely accurate.

3. C

   (A) is true, but (R) is false.

   Option (c) claims that Assertion (A) is true, but Reason (R) is false. This is incorrect because the President and Parliament are not bound to accept the views or recommendations of the state legislature regarding its territory or boundaries.

4. D

   (A) is false, but (R) is true.

   Option (d) claims that Assertion (A) is false, but Reason (R) is true. This is incorrect because Assertion (A) is entirely true in accordance with the constitutional procedure laid down in Article 3 of the Constitution of India.

Summary. Official key is (b) because both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) correctly state separate constitutional facts regarding state boundary reorganization under Article 3. Assertion (A) outlines the mandatory step of seeking state views within a specified period, whereas Reason (R) highlights the non-binding nature of those state views on the Union. Since (R) merely adds an independent constitutional rule rather than explaining the genesis of the Presidential recommendation in (A), it is not the correct explanation. Therefore, both statements are independently true, but (R) does not explain (A).